Back then, when we all believed...
-
fat_boy wrote:
And there was me thinking GW was supposed to bring warmer winters...
You really don't know what GW is do you... The planet is on average getting warmer. One should also note that snow does not form well in sub zero temps. The true point of global warming is the impact of quick mean temp changes. It cause extreme storms and weather. For example, you will not necessarily see more hurricanes, tornadoes, blizzards (yes cold a$$ blizzards), etc. or less even. You will however see the strength increase. If you do not understand why this is start studying meteorology and you will realize weather is nasty when large differences colide. Well what the heck do you think happens when you increase the average temp of the planet by a couple degrees???
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
You really don't know what GW is do you...
ROFL It is really hard to keep up with the definitions since every time one is shown to be wrong, another takes its place. As I understand it the latest theory is that Global Warming is like to bring a great deal of Global Cooling. Did I get it right?
"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth. I have observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." ~ Benj Franklin
-
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Yeah, sure, 4 of the five snowiest NH winters are since 2003 and you say I dont recognise an average? Idiot.
"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct from natural variation." Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville
fat_boy wrote:
Idiot.
:thumbsup:
"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth. I have observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." ~ Benj Franklin
-
fat_boy wrote:
He got that wrong didnt he!
Yes, Johnny One Note, he did. Have you anything new to add to the subject of AGW, GW, Climate Change? Poor Johnny One Note Sang out with Gusto And just overloaded the place. Poor Johnny One Note Yelled willy-nilly Until he was blue in the face, For holding one note was his ace.
ict558 wrote:
Have you anything new to add to the subject of AGW, GW, Climate Change?
You obviously didn't.
"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth. I have observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." ~ Benj Franklin
-
ict558 wrote:
Have you anything new to add to the subject of AGW, GW, Climate Change?
You obviously didn't.
"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth. I have observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." ~ Benj Franklin
-
Oakman wrote:
You obviously didn't.
No, I didn't. But had fat_boy been posting his 150,000th moan on the iniquities of penalty shoot-outs in Soccer, I would probably have posted the Johnny One Note comment.
ict558 wrote:
But had fat_boy been posting his 150,000th moan on the iniquities of penalty shoot-outs in Soccer, I would probably have posted the Johnny One Note comment.
In other words, even though what he wrote was true, and even though it is an issue on which a lot of misguided politicians are spending money, and even though, by your own admission, you have no opinion or facts worth posting, you felt it necessary to do what you could to shut him up?
"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth. I have observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." ~ Benj Franklin
-
ict558 wrote:
But had fat_boy been posting his 150,000th moan on the iniquities of penalty shoot-outs in Soccer, I would probably have posted the Johnny One Note comment.
In other words, even though what he wrote was true, and even though it is an issue on which a lot of misguided politicians are spending money, and even though, by your own admission, you have no opinion or facts worth posting, you felt it necessary to do what you could to shut him up?
"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth. I have observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." ~ Benj Franklin
Oakman wrote:
even though what he wrote was true
But had fat_boy been posting his 150,000th moan on the iniquities of penalty shoot-outs in Soccer, and had each post been 100% accurate in every detail, I would probably have posted the Johnny One Note comment.
Oakman wrote:
even though it is an issue on which a lot of misguided politicians are spending money
Which I take up directly with said politicians, as I doubt if any read the Code Project forums.
Oakman wrote:
and even though, by your own admission, you have no opinion or facts worth posting
So having nothing new to add to the subject of AGW, GW, or Climate Change, equates to having no opinion or facts worth posting? An interesting distortion.
Oakman wrote:
you felt it necessary to do what you could to shut him up
I felt it necessary to inform him that I now find his climate posts repetitive and tedious (as have others). There is no danger that anything I post could shut him up.
-
see this proves my point. I made a general statement about debating and you return with "general GW information"
As barmey as a sack of badgers Dude, if I knew what I was doing in life, I'd be rich, retired, dating a supermodel and laughing at the rest of you from the sidelines.
Simon_Whale wrote:
I made a general statement about debating
No, you told me I ignore the facts. I just pointed out the facts to you of which I am perfectly aware, yet which about a third of the populace seem happy to ignore.
"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct from natural variation." Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville
-
fat_boy wrote:
Collin Jasnoch wrote: One should also note that snow does not form well in sub zero temps. So it forms much better in above zero temps?
A small part of research shows that temperature does have an effect on snow fall!! but its "too cold to snow" is a bad interpretation of the below According to METEOROLOGIST JEFF HABY[^] "The ingredients for snow are: (1) a temperature profile that allows snow to reach the surface, (2) saturated air, and (3) enough lifting of that saturated air to allow snow to develop aloft and fall to reach the surface. In a situation when it is said "it is too cold to snow" there is in reality not enough lifting of air that causes snow to reach the surface. The phrase "it is too cold to snow today" probably originated as a misapplication of the relationship between temperature and the maximum amount of water vapor that can be in the air. When temperature decreases, the maximum capacity of water vapor that can be in the air decreases. Therefore, the colder it gets the less water vapor there will be in the air." so interpreting that article the water vapour in the air decreases as the temperature fall thus reducing the chances of snowfall happening!
As barmey as a sack of badgers Dude, if I knew what I was doing in life, I'd be rich, retired, dating a supermodel and laughing at the rest of you from the sidelines.
Yes, snow is always heaviest close to zero, but to use increased snow cover as evidence that it has got warmer, whihch is what the origial respondee stated, is clearly bonkers. Yes, in areas that are already cold increased snow thikness will suggest higher humidity and hence temperature. Increased sno cover indicates that a larger area than previously is experiencing colder temperatures. BBut this kiind if illogical thinking is common of AGW proponents. My favourite is the resuloution of lack of tropospheric warming problem (this shows that GH gas warming is not ocuring at present). To resolve this some scientists used wind as proxy for temperature, and came up with the desired warming.
"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct from natural variation." Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville
-
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
You really don't know what GW is do you...
ROFL It is really hard to keep up with the definitions since every time one is shown to be wrong, another takes its place. As I understand it the latest theory is that Global Warming is like to bring a great deal of Global Cooling. Did I get it right?
"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth. I have observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." ~ Benj Franklin
No, thats the old terminology. THe latest is, wait for it... GLOBAL CLIMATE DISRUPTION! Ye hee, bellsm and whistles, drun roll please! THis is the new daddy of alarmist propaganda. And what a peach it is. Just the right dose of fear, a soupscon of science and there you have it!
"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct from natural variation." Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville
-
fat_boy wrote:
He got that wrong didnt he!
Yes, Johnny One Note, he did. Have you anything new to add to the subject of AGW, GW, Climate Change? Poor Johnny One Note Sang out with Gusto And just overloaded the place. Poor Johnny One Note Yelled willy-nilly Until he was blue in the face, For holding one note was his ace.
I find a heck of lot of posts on CP boring. Anything to do with sport, almost anything to do with computers. Do I insult the authors? Do I instst they stop posting? So whats with AGW? Why do so many people, perhaps including you, react when I deride it? Answer that honestly if you can.
"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct from natural variation." Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville
-
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
You really don't know what GW is do you...
ROFL It is really hard to keep up with the definitions since every time one is shown to be wrong, another takes its place. As I understand it the latest theory is that Global Warming is like to bring a great deal of Global Cooling. Did I get it right?
"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth. I have observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." ~ Benj Franklin
Oakman wrote:
As I understand it the latest theory is that Global Warming is like to bring a great deal of Global Cooling
Apparently you can't read. I said it has large impacts on weather. Again, why don't you do some basic reading. Oh wait you seem to be illiterate because you think someone wrote/said it brings global cooling. Just because the average temp is rising doesn't mean all temps rise. You obviously know nothing about statistic even. Here... rather then I rant on an on about you knowing nothing why don't you prove me wrong and read something that shows how "Right" you are.... Derrr.. How do I find out more teach?... Me not so smart u c.[^]
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
-
I find a heck of lot of posts on CP boring. Anything to do with sport, almost anything to do with computers. Do I insult the authors? Do I instst they stop posting? So whats with AGW? Why do so many people, perhaps including you, react when I deride it? Answer that honestly if you can.
"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct from natural variation." Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville
fat_boy wrote:
Do I insult the authors?
fat_boy wrote:
Yeah, sure, 4 of the five snowiest NH winters are since 2003 and you say I dont recognise an average? Idiot.
Why yes... Yes you do. Who sounds like the idiot now?
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
-
Oakman wrote:
As I understand it the latest theory is that Global Warming is like to bring a great deal of Global Cooling
Apparently you can't read. I said it has large impacts on weather. Again, why don't you do some basic reading. Oh wait you seem to be illiterate because you think someone wrote/said it brings global cooling. Just because the average temp is rising doesn't mean all temps rise. You obviously know nothing about statistic even. Here... rather then I rant on an on about you knowing nothing why don't you prove me wrong and read something that shows how "Right" you are.... Derrr.. How do I find out more teach?... Me not so smart u c.[^]
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
Apparently you can't read. I said
I wasn't referring to you, I was referring to the "scientists" who are trying to explain why all of their predictions have turned out to be wrong.
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
You obviously know nothing about statistic even.
Anyone who comes to that conclusions based on the (false) premise that I did not know that and/or didn't take it into account would appear to know nothing about logic.
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
rather then I rant on an on about you knowing nothing why don't you prove me wrong and read something that shows
I've read a great deal about the issue, especially since I started off believing that man-made global warming was a serious threat and the carbon dioxide was the cause. I would certain NOT bother to read something that, in its title, shows that it is not an independent and objective study of the issue, but simply more b.s. When, if, you ever decide to discuss the issue rationally rather than conducting a series of ad hominem attacks because you have no ad rem arguments, do get back to me, but please, no more schoolyard insults. It's a waste of Chris's bandwidth.
"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth. I have observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." ~ Benj Franklin
-
No, thats the old terminology. THe latest is, wait for it... GLOBAL CLIMATE DISRUPTION! Ye hee, bellsm and whistles, drun roll please! THis is the new daddy of alarmist propaganda. And what a peach it is. Just the right dose of fear, a soupscon of science and there you have it!
"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct from natural variation." Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville
fat_boy wrote:
GLOBAL CLIMATE DISRUPTION!
And if disruption don't scare you, then maybe datruption will.
"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth. I have observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." ~ Benj Franklin
-
fat_boy wrote:
Do I insult the authors?
fat_boy wrote:
Yeah, sure, 4 of the five snowiest NH winters are since 2003 and you say I dont recognise an average? Idiot.
Why yes... Yes you do. Who sounds like the idiot now?
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
Who sounds like the idiot now?
You. Consistently. Why don't you try conducting a discussion/argument as an adult for a change?
"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth. I have observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." ~ Benj Franklin
-
fat_boy wrote:
Do I insult the authors?
fat_boy wrote:
Yeah, sure, 4 of the five snowiest NH winters are since 2003 and you say I dont recognise an average? Idiot.
Why yes... Yes you do. Who sounds like the idiot now?
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
Christ thats so feeble. You know full well I am refering to OPs in my first statement and a brainless prick in my second. I'll tell you what, join the club. Fuck off too.
"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct from natural variation." Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville
-
Oakman wrote:
As I understand it the latest theory is that Global Warming is like to bring a great deal of Global Cooling
Apparently you can't read. I said it has large impacts on weather. Again, why don't you do some basic reading. Oh wait you seem to be illiterate because you think someone wrote/said it brings global cooling. Just because the average temp is rising doesn't mean all temps rise. You obviously know nothing about statistic even. Here... rather then I rant on an on about you knowing nothing why don't you prove me wrong and read something that shows how "Right" you are.... Derrr.. How do I find out more teach?... Me not so smart u c.[^]
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
Just because the average temp is rising doesn't mean all temps rise. You obviously know nothing about statistic even.
And you dont know jack shit about the theoretical effect of CO2. Yes, all temps will rise, with the cold areas and periods rising the most. And the troposphere will rise more than the surface, since its in the troposphere where the heat is supposedly collected and reradiated back to the surface. And you also seem to know very little about averages, since extreme values, or duration, or extent will skew even a global average. So we have record cold over large parts of the earth for many years. So whats the average doing? Chump.
"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct from natural variation." Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville
-
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
Just because the average temp is rising doesn't mean all temps rise. You obviously know nothing about statistic even.
And you dont know jack shit about the theoretical effect of CO2. Yes, all temps will rise, with the cold areas and periods rising the most. And the troposphere will rise more than the surface, since its in the troposphere where the heat is supposedly collected and reradiated back to the surface. And you also seem to know very little about averages, since extreme values, or duration, or extent will skew even a global average. So we have record cold over large parts of the earth for many years. So whats the average doing? Chump.
"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct from natural variation." Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville
fat_boy wrote:
Chump.
Is that all you are filled with is insults? No intelligence eh. I guess you are just a "Fat Boy" Grow up dude and get your butt back to school. I'm done as this thread is going no where...
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
-
fat_boy wrote:
Chump.
Is that all you are filled with is insults? No intelligence eh. I guess you are just a "Fat Boy" Grow up dude and get your butt back to school. I'm done as this thread is going no where...
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
Is that all you are filled with is insults?
Unlike some, I dont suffer fools gladly.
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
No intelligence eh.
I know the limitations of trying to educate the willfuly stupid.
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
Grow up dude and get your butt back to school.
If get any older I'll be dead. Chump.
"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct from natural variation." Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville
-
I find a heck of lot of posts on CP boring. Anything to do with sport, almost anything to do with computers. Do I insult the authors? Do I instst they stop posting? So whats with AGW? Why do so many people, perhaps including you, react when I deride it? Answer that honestly if you can.
"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct from natural variation." Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville
fat_boy wrote:
So whats with AGW? Why do so many people, perhaps including you, react when I deride it?
Nothing, it is an interesting topic, but going nana n nana at climatologists is boring. You linked to an article Solar Activity and Climate, which was interesting. But then you presumed that the authors (who would ride roughshod over the likes of Mann and Jones) were 'afraid' to propose Solar Activity as the driver of climate change, rather than CO2. Why would they? How could they? They have not even confirmed the mechanism by which Solar Activity affects the climate. Had they done that, they would be no better than the 'Hockey Team'.